H.R. 822 being heard tomorrow 8/13/11


Doc Mustang

New member
On this issue, Federal Legislation forcing the states to recognize each other's permits is not a good idea. This explicitly defines that concealed carry may be regulated by the Federal government. Once this admission is in place other regulation is sure to follow.

It would also be a significant violation of the tenth amendment to the constitution as it would be a significant centralization of power to the federal government, the very thing we should be trying to prevent.

Rather it should be argued that States which forbid all public carrying of arms, either by statute or through "may issue" permitting systems which are in fact "non-issue" is a violation of the now incorporated, second amendment.

The next step should be to get rid of the permitting process entirely. This should be done using the courts and not legislation. Again anything that can be given through legislation can be taken away. Court decisions tend to be more binding and restrict governmental power. (An aspect of Judicial Review which has been largely absent in the last 100 years).

We need to be progressing toward the concept that laws forbiding the carrying of arms by a free people, in public are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
 

B2Tall

Stirrer of the Pot
That's not really what I said....

I understand that, but after reading the bill it seems that the only way around it would be for a state to stop issuing permits all together, resident and non-resident alike. To only stop issuing non-res permits would have no effect on the bill, which says that any state that issues CC permits (the bill doesn't differentiate between res/non-res) would be required to recognize the permits from other states.
 

jg1967

New member
It's called the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004. Part of Homeland Defense. It is very succinct. Basically it grants any peace officer with off duty carry privileges the right to carry in all 50 states. I said reciprocity above, but that's not exactly true. It goes farther than that by granting LEOs exemption from state laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms. There are certain requirements, but very reasonable. Check it out. If you are LEO or retired LEO, you may have more carry rights than you knew.

Link Removed

Enjoy!

I am not and I dislike the fact that LEOs get extra privileges that we all should be able to enjoy. I have nothing against LEOs per se, by the way.
 

Nightmare45

NRA LIFE MEMBER
2nd Amemdment rules, we already have the right to carry in every state, nationwide constitutional carry, this bill will die with the likes of Harry, and the loser pres we have.
 

G50AE

Well-known member
I am not and I dislike the fact that LEOs get extra privileges that we all should be able to enjoy. I have nothing against LEOs per se, by the way.

I agree, I think LEOSA is a bunch of crap. If cops need to run around all fifty states armed with guns, even though they are not on duty, then the rest of us should have the right to do so as well. Creating a "super-citizen" class is garbage, I don't care if it is LEO's, military, or federal government workers.
 

weekendskp

New member
There's no way those gun-friendly states would do away with CC, but other not-so-friendly states like NJ or Hawaii might very well do so. They hardly issue any permits in the first place so they don't have much to lose. I find it hard to believe that the "anti" states would simply do a 180 and allow people to CC just because of this law.

I don't hold much hope for H.R. 822 to pass, but it wouldn't change much anyway. At least not for the Nazi Republic of Joisey. They've allowed false information like, "hollow points are armor piercing", and "pistol grips on a long gun make it an assault rifle" to perpetuate in their legislation. They (NJ) are as likely to go "non-issue" than to accept out-of-state permits. Kalifornia issues a lot of permits, but one would really have to be extra cautious being from out of state. Leave your Winchester Talons and Speer Gold Dots at home. New York, Maine, and Oregon would likely accept the National Right to Carry, but CT, DE, MD, and MA - no way! The end result would still be spotty regions that are off limits just like now.
 

the dark

New member
Seems a bit inconsistent to want as little federal government intrusion as possible and then want it to overrule state's rights. Not only overrule, but, in may ways, preempt states just as state governments have preempted local regulation. Do we want the federal government essentially asserting the it "rules the field" with regard to CC? Not sure I am liking that. I prefer pressure on states to establish reciprocity agreements.
 

Iam2Taz

New member
Seems a bit inconsistent to want as little federal government intrusion as possible and then want it to overrule state's rights. Not only overrule, but, in may ways, preempt states just as state governments have preempted local regulation. Do we want the federal government essentially asserting the it "rules the field" with regard to CC? Not sure I am liking that. I prefer pressure on states to establish reciprocity agreements.

Didn't we have a small war over states rights a few years back? I don't want the FEDs in anything. I want the states to adhere to the constitution. PERIOD.
 
Didn't we have a small war over states rights a few years back? I don't want the FEDs in anything. I want the states to adhere to the constitution. PERIOD.

There was no war over 'states rights'. EVERYONE involved in the Civil War believed that it was over the potential abolishing of slavery. It is historical record that The Union was fighting to 'preserve the Union', NOT to abolish slavery. The Confederate States were fighting to preserve, prolong and expand slavery into the new territories. Letters from soldiers to their families have confirmed this over and over again. Northerners wanted a "Union", the CSA wanted slavery. The CSA attempted to garner favor for their position by claiming that the states and territories had the right to decide on slavery; while fixing votes and committing acts of murder on those who opposed slavery.

I do agree that federal involvement in CCDW is probably a bad idea as it sets a precedent that I think we do not want. Press for states to pass reciprocity.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,435
Messages
623,627
Members
74,270
Latest member
rlrsk8r
Top